This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles
A fact from American premieres of Dmitri Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 August 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Latest comment: 1 year ago5 comments4 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
... that news coverage preceding the American premieres of Dmitri Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7 was described as a "great fever of war-hysterical publicity"? Source: "The thickest aura and the loudest Babel—a true international Babel this time, in many tongues—have surrounded the Seventh ('Leningrad') Symphony, ever since the composer's autograph score was microfilmed and flown to New York by way of Teheran and Cairo in a great fever of war-hysterical publicity, for performance under Arturo Toscanini." ("Shostakovich and Us" by Richard Taruskin in Shostakovich in Context, p. 17)
ALT1: ... that years after premiering Dmitri Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7 in the US, Arturo Toscanini asked if he had really learned and conducted "such junk"? Source: "Years later, while listening to his NBC performance of [Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7], Toscanini allegedly asked, 'Did I really learn and conduct such junk?'" (Arturo Toscanini: The NBC Years by Mortimer H. Frank, p. 66)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
My hands are full at the moment, so please give me until September 10 (PDT) to answer your concerns in detail and to start the article clean-up. Thank you as always! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
A live CBS radio broadcast of a performance of his Symphony No. 1 on December 7, 1941, was interrupted by breaking news of the Empire of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. - IMO, not lead worthy; certainly good for the rest of the prose, but it's not particularly to summarizing DSCH's perception in the US
Elie Siegmeister and Amnon Balber in an article published in Musical America and the Brooklyn Daily Eagle said - IMO, unnecessary detail about the source of the quote- just using the newspaper is fine
He completed the symphony on December 27 and spent the next few hours - "the next few hours" makes it sound like present tense; perhaps "spent the following hours"
dynamics, phrasing, and expressive markings - add wls for the non-musician reader
Done, I think, but could only find one passage where musical terminology was explicitly used. May I please have a list of other passages that need amending? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
and played the symphony for them. - likely worth clarifying that this was the piano reduction
Among his guests were harpist Vera Dulova and conductor Alexander Melik-Pashayev, who hoped to premiere the symphony. - "the latter of whom hoped to..."
In efn a, is Shostakovich's personally selected biographer supported by the ref? Same for According to Sofia Khentova, Shostakovich's official biographer, the composer accepted...
"Shostakovich's Seventh and most important symphony—ninety minutes [sic] of music..." - sic should be italicized and linked; same goes for anytime sic is said in the article
James Hilton quoted in his column Shostakovich's remarks imploring his fellow Soviet citizens to maintain their resolve in the defense of their country;[43] another columnist in Pasadena, California, quoting the same asked rhetorically, "Can a nation endowed with such a spirit be defeated?"[44] An article from Dayton, Ohio, illustrated Russian people's devotion to music by reporting on how during the symphony's Moscow premiere the musicians and audience ignored an air raid warning in order to let the performance continue.[45] The Honolulu Star-Bulletin declared that Shostakovich was "among the greatest of contemporary composers."[46] - throughout all these reviews, the use of author, paper, or city is inconsistent. One uses the author, some others use the city of the newspaper, and one just uses the name of the paper. I suggest using on format for consistency- all work just fine
How is the "Intermezzo interrotto" section relevant to America?
Bartók's reaction and resulting movement for his Concerto for Orchestra were direct results of the American mania for Shostakovich 7 and Toscanini's broadcast. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
Refs are placed in a proper 'References' section
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
Sources consist of reliable books and newspaper articles; all good here
I worry about the number of blockquotes. While a number of them are certainly necessary in my opinion, some are reviews that could easily be paraphrased/summarized and backed by other reviewers; particularly the quotes under "Recordings" and Kay's quote under "Criticism". One of the quotes under "Press coverage" should be cut, since they both reflect the same idea: "Shosty's masterpiece, we will all love it, etc etc" (please excuse my extreme reductiveness, this is just for the review's sake)
Earwig shows no violations, quote use is appropriate
IMO, the portrait of Beethoven is unnecessary; the Beethoven comparisons are mentioned in one sentence near the photo, then again in another sentence further away
The image sizing across the article is odd to me. Some images (e.g. NBC staff examining microfilm) are rather small, while others (e.g. Shosty in firefighting gear are rather large. I think there could be better consistency here
Don't think Sandburg is needed either, since he's mentioned in one sentence in that section
Images are relevant and properly captioned
7. Overall assessment.
Thank you for your patience! I'll be editing according to your review in a bit, but wanted clarification on a few points. A number of sections of the review are rated "don't know"; specifically dealing with the sections on prose quality, adherence to the MOS, no OR, and whether or not the article is sufficiently broad, neutral, and on-topic. However, there is no explanation as to why these are rated as such. May I please have explanations so I can fix these problems? Thank you again! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:37, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for not answering this concern previously: my reason for the inconsistency in image sizes is for concern with how text looks in desktop and mobile views. I experimented with different sizes and placements prior to the final versions, but found these caused the article text to be distorted. However, I can resize them in a consistent manner if you believe this to be better. Please let me know! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Just one more day, please. Work is keeping me extra busy, but I promise to return tomorrow in the afternoon (PDT) and finally get this thing to the finish line! Thank you as always!! :) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
@MyCatIsAChonk Thank you so much for being patient. I really appreciate it. Was not trying to slack off with this GA nomination, but my real-life duties have been piling on as of late. So about the lead citations: are these necessary if they are cited within the article body? My understanding, which might be wrong, is that as long as the material is cited in the body, it does not also need one in the lead. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. Thank you again! :) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.